Peer Device Set Action Selection via Suitability Evaluation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing computing scenarios face inefficiencies and user irritation due to redundant message presentations across multiple devices, reliance on centralized servers for device status updates, and the onerous need for explicit user selection of devices for actions, which can lead to inappropriate or dangerous situations.

Innovation Solution

A peer-based architecture where devices within a set evaluate their suitability for performing actions based on their capabilities and context, allowing them to autonomously select the most appropriate device to execute requests, reducing server dependency and user intervention.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Extent of automation

If a centralized server is used to manage device status and select devices for actions, then device selection can be coordinated, but server load increases and user privacy is compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice selection automationVSAvoidserver load
Core Design Contradiction:
Extent of automationVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts the device selection logic from the centralized server and distributes it to individual devices. Each device independently evaluates its own suitability for performing actions by assessing its current state (battery level, processing capacity, location, etc.) and makes autonomous decisions about whether to accept action requests, eliminating the need for continuous server-mediated device selection and reducing server load.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent combines multiple functions into the requesting device itself: it evaluates suitability criteria, selects appropriate devices from the set, and executes the action coordination locally. This merging of evaluation, selection, and execution functions at the peer level replaces the centralized server's role in these operations, reducing server dependency while maintaining automated device selection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

2Loss of information

If all devices in the set are notified of every action request, then complete information is provided, but redundant presentations occur causing user irritation

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaction information completenessVSAvoiduser experience
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements local quality by having each device independently evaluate its own suitability for performing the requested action based on local criteria such as current state, capabilities, and context. Devices that determine they are not suitable do not present the action to the user, while only suitable devices present the action. This ensures complete information distribution to potentially suitable devices while filtering out redundant presentations to unsuitable devices, improving user experience.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Measurement precision

If explicit user selection of devices is required for each action, then precise control is achieved, but user burden increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice selection precisionVSAvoiduser effort
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent enables devices to serve themselves by autonomously evaluating their suitability for performing actions and making decisions about whether to accept or present actions to the user. Each device independently assesses its own state (battery level, processing capacity, location, etc.) and determines its own participation in actions, eliminating the need for explicit user selection while maintaining precise device selection through automated suitability evaluation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

4Measurement precision

If devices continuously update their status to the server, then accurate device selection is possible, but energy consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice status accuracyVSAvoiddevice energy consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts the status evaluation function from server-based processing and performs it locally at each device. Devices continuously monitor their own state (battery level, processing capacity, location, etc.) and use this information to evaluate their suitability for actions without needing to continuously report to the server. This local evaluation eliminates redundant communication and reduces energy consumption while maintaining accurate device status information for selection decisions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Data Source

PatentEP3146427B1Peer-based device set actions
Publication Date: 2023.09.13 MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC
  • EP3146427B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3146427B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3146427B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A device set may interoperate to perform an action, such as providing a message to a user or storing photos taken by a user. Performing the action on all available devices may cause redundancy (e.g., presenting the same message to the user on each device), and depending on user selection (e.g., the user requesting to play music and specifically designating a device) may become onerous. A centralized, server-driven selection of the device to perform the action may be problematic if the server is inaccessible and/or inaccurate if not currently informed of the current state of each device. In accordance with the techniques presented herein, a requesting device broadcasts an action invitation to the device set. Each device provides a suitability report indicating its suitability to perform the action. The requesting device identifies one or more suitable devices, and sends an action request to identified devices to perform the action.